In re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Yang
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 2010, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re Disciplinary Action Against Aitken (Minn. 2010)
- In re Petition for Disciplinary Action Against Arbeiter (Minn. 2009)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
ORDER
The Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility has filed a petition for disciplinary action alleging that respondent Su Yang committed professional misconduct warranting public discipline, namely, forging the signatures of one party in a marital dissolution matter and that of her attorney, obtaining false notariza- *734 tions, and knowingly submitting the documents to the court, in violation of Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 3.3(a)(3), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d). Respondent admits his conduct violated the Rules of Professional Conduct, waives his procedural rights under Rule 14, Rules on Lawyers Professional Responsibility (RLPR), and has entered into a stipulation with the Director in which the parties jointly recommend that the appropriate discipline is an indefinite suspension from the practice of law for a minimum of 6 months.
The court has independently reviewed the file and approves the jointly recommended disposition.
Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that respondent Su Yang is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of 6 months, effective as of the date of filing of this order. Respondent may petition for reinstatement no earlier than four months from the date of filing of this order. Reinstatement is further conditioned upon successful completion of the professional responsibility portion of the bar examination and satisfaction of continuing legal education requirements pursuant to Rule 18(e), RLPR. Respondent shall pay costs in the amount of $900, pursuant to Rule 24(d), RLPR. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel and tribunals).
BY THE COURT:
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.